Search
Search results
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated 2:HRS (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
The concept of knowing when you’re going to die is a fascinating one, and sparks many philosophical debates. Would you like to know so you can do everything you’ve wanted, or would you rather live in blissful ignorance and take life as it comes? Unfortunately for our protagonist, Tim, he doesn’t really get the opportunity to debate this after encountering a machine that correctly predicts the lifespan of every living thing. The title 2:HRS relates to the time predicted by the machine, which encourages Tim to use his time left wisely.
Whilst it’s a harrowing revelation, the events that follow are predominantly slapstick and family-friendly, with the occasional heartwarming moment thrown in. Tim isn’t alone on his quest to check off his bucket list, being accompanied by two of his school friends who he convinced to ditch a school trip with him. This decision is how they stumbled across the machine in the first palace, so the trio certainly got more than they bargained for that day. Like any adventure, an antagonist is close behind, and in this case its the machine’s inventor who wants to see the prediction come true no matter what.
Despite being an intriguing concept for all ages, 2:HRS falls flat in a lot of places. The script is more cringe-worthy than funny, and whilst I appreciate the target audience is younger than me, I still believe it would’ve benefited from better screenwriting. That being said, the actors worked well with what they were given and gave great performances throughout. I probably laughed about three times throughout the film, so at least I can give them that. The young actors were especially good, and I’m looking forward to seeing their future work as I know they could go far.
Another thing that bothered me was the ending. It ended so abruptly and nothing was really tied up, which was a huge disappointment for me. I didn’t like their decision to leave it so open-ended as it didn’t make sense nor make an impact. It was probably designed to coax one last laugh from audiences, but didn’t work for me sadly. 2:HRS does have some redeeming scenes that I enjoyed a lot, including a moment near the end of the film with Tim and his sister. If the rest of the film had been of that quality, I would have rated it higher.
Overall, 2:HRS feels like an average, forgettable film but an entertaining watch when you’re relaxing on the sofa looking for something light-hearted to stick on. It’s worth a watch, but it’s not a film I’ll be rewatching any time soon.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/07/30/the-clock-is-ticking-my-thoughts-on-2hrs/
Whilst it’s a harrowing revelation, the events that follow are predominantly slapstick and family-friendly, with the occasional heartwarming moment thrown in. Tim isn’t alone on his quest to check off his bucket list, being accompanied by two of his school friends who he convinced to ditch a school trip with him. This decision is how they stumbled across the machine in the first palace, so the trio certainly got more than they bargained for that day. Like any adventure, an antagonist is close behind, and in this case its the machine’s inventor who wants to see the prediction come true no matter what.
Despite being an intriguing concept for all ages, 2:HRS falls flat in a lot of places. The script is more cringe-worthy than funny, and whilst I appreciate the target audience is younger than me, I still believe it would’ve benefited from better screenwriting. That being said, the actors worked well with what they were given and gave great performances throughout. I probably laughed about three times throughout the film, so at least I can give them that. The young actors were especially good, and I’m looking forward to seeing their future work as I know they could go far.
Another thing that bothered me was the ending. It ended so abruptly and nothing was really tied up, which was a huge disappointment for me. I didn’t like their decision to leave it so open-ended as it didn’t make sense nor make an impact. It was probably designed to coax one last laugh from audiences, but didn’t work for me sadly. 2:HRS does have some redeeming scenes that I enjoyed a lot, including a moment near the end of the film with Tim and his sister. If the rest of the film had been of that quality, I would have rated it higher.
Overall, 2:HRS feels like an average, forgettable film but an entertaining watch when you’re relaxing on the sofa looking for something light-hearted to stick on. It’s worth a watch, but it’s not a film I’ll be rewatching any time soon.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/07/30/the-clock-is-ticking-my-thoughts-on-2hrs/
JT (287 KP) rated The Dictator (2012) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Sacha Baron Cohen is back doing what he does best, offending everyone and anyone without so much as a care in the world. The Dictator is a much funnier venture than Bruno was (while not quite as shocking) and still provides some hilarious moments.Given the recent run of press that dictators like Saddam Hussein, Colonel Gaddafi and Kim Jong Il have had this provides an untapped platform of Cohen’s ability to step up to.
As fictional dictator Hafez Aladeen he rules over The Republic of Wadiya, and Cohen models the character on all of the above in some way. The film is even dedicated to the memory of Kim Jong Il, and let’s not forget his real life appearance at a US awards ceremony where he spilled the ashes of the Korean dictator all over the red carpet and on entertainment anchor Ryan Seacrest.
It’s not that Aladeen is particularly vicious, despite claiming that he has sent men to execution for the slightest thing, say not making weapons of mass destruction with a pointy top, he’s just a bit of an idiot.
After refusing to sell Wadiyan oil internationally and denying that he has or is in the process of making nuclear weapons Aladeen heads to New York to address the UN Council. While there he’s captured and left to fend for himself on the streets of New York, while one of his lookalikes takes his place in order to sign a document democratizing Wadiya and opening the country’s oil fields for business.
In typical Cohen fashion there are some scenes that might still touch the nerves of a few American civilians. One particular involves Aladeen and his former head of the W.M.D. program, Nadal take a joy flight in a helicopter above the New York Skyline.
While surveying the landscape they talk in Wadiyan about Aladeen’s Porsche 911, well you can pretty much see where it’s going to go from there. It’s one of a few great scenes that you’re either going to wince at or laugh out loud. The film also draws in the acting talents of Ben Kingsley (how or why he agreed is beyond me) as Aladeen’s right hand man who is responsible for the plot to bring him down.
Also along for the ride is Anna Faris, no slouch when it comes to the slapstick comedy field, she’s more than at home here as Aladeen’s love interest. Directed by Larry Charles who was also behind the camera for Borat and Bruno it keeps tradition with juvenile humor and un-politically correct jokes. If you don’t laugh you’ll be asking yourself how the hell has he got away with it….again!?
As fictional dictator Hafez Aladeen he rules over The Republic of Wadiya, and Cohen models the character on all of the above in some way. The film is even dedicated to the memory of Kim Jong Il, and let’s not forget his real life appearance at a US awards ceremony where he spilled the ashes of the Korean dictator all over the red carpet and on entertainment anchor Ryan Seacrest.
It’s not that Aladeen is particularly vicious, despite claiming that he has sent men to execution for the slightest thing, say not making weapons of mass destruction with a pointy top, he’s just a bit of an idiot.
After refusing to sell Wadiyan oil internationally and denying that he has or is in the process of making nuclear weapons Aladeen heads to New York to address the UN Council. While there he’s captured and left to fend for himself on the streets of New York, while one of his lookalikes takes his place in order to sign a document democratizing Wadiya and opening the country’s oil fields for business.
In typical Cohen fashion there are some scenes that might still touch the nerves of a few American civilians. One particular involves Aladeen and his former head of the W.M.D. program, Nadal take a joy flight in a helicopter above the New York Skyline.
While surveying the landscape they talk in Wadiyan about Aladeen’s Porsche 911, well you can pretty much see where it’s going to go from there. It’s one of a few great scenes that you’re either going to wince at or laugh out loud. The film also draws in the acting talents of Ben Kingsley (how or why he agreed is beyond me) as Aladeen’s right hand man who is responsible for the plot to bring him down.
Also along for the ride is Anna Faris, no slouch when it comes to the slapstick comedy field, she’s more than at home here as Aladeen’s love interest. Directed by Larry Charles who was also behind the camera for Borat and Bruno it keeps tradition with juvenile humor and un-politically correct jokes. If you don’t laugh you’ll be asking yourself how the hell has he got away with it….again!?
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Final Destination 5 (2011) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 11, 2019)
Did we really need another Final Destination film? After the last, merely average movie, the answer on everyone’s lips was a firm and resounding no. However, a surprising return to form for the franchise has ensured that even this old goat has life in it yet.
Gone are the cheap, cheesy shocks that littered Final Destination 3 and 4. In their place are the genuine thrills and spills from the first two films. The movie returns the guessing game element to its audience and for that I am thoroughly grateful.
Newcomer Steven Quale helms this instalment which combines excellent 3D with fantastic special effects and a dazzling set of opening credits which showcase the deaths from the films that preceded it. I wasn’t expecting much from this film, I have to admit, but the credits really are a highlight as you try and remember which film each death is from.
As with any film in the Final Destination franchise, an epic opening disaster is the norm. Whilst the motorway pileup from Final Destination 2 has been the best up until now, the bridge collapse in this film is utterly mesmerising and edge of your seat thrilling. From the flawless special effects to the scale of the production, it surpasses anything seen before in the series.
The deaths have also returned to form too. Instead of out and out cheese, they’re shocking to the point of jaw-dropping. It’ll have you checking every loose nut and bolt from now on and probably have you resisting that fashionable laser eye surgery too. Thankfully though, away from the deaths, it errs on the side of humorous without delving into slapstick.
Nicholas D’Agosto leads a small cast as they try and find a way to cheat death after surviving that epic bridge disaster. An interesting storyline this time around has the cast told that they are able to cheat death by killing someone else, therefore having their life swapped with yours. The acting from all corners leaves a lot to be desired and the dialogue and performances are unashamedly wooden but this is a small point in a film that really does shock and surprise.
However, perhaps the best part of the film and the reason why it’s so enjoyable is the final twist, a twist that will leave you shouting at the screen in dismay. It’s practically impossible to see it coming until the last 5 minutes and in these last minutes you realise just how clever director Steven Quale has been in creating this film.
It may not be the most original movie to ever grace the big screen and the cast aren’t going to trouble the Oscars but Final Destination 5 returns a lifeless franchise to what it once was, bloody good fun and as such it is by far, the best in the series.
So, the question now is; do we need Final Destination 6?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/09/21/review-final-destination-5-2011/
Gone are the cheap, cheesy shocks that littered Final Destination 3 and 4. In their place are the genuine thrills and spills from the first two films. The movie returns the guessing game element to its audience and for that I am thoroughly grateful.
Newcomer Steven Quale helms this instalment which combines excellent 3D with fantastic special effects and a dazzling set of opening credits which showcase the deaths from the films that preceded it. I wasn’t expecting much from this film, I have to admit, but the credits really are a highlight as you try and remember which film each death is from.
As with any film in the Final Destination franchise, an epic opening disaster is the norm. Whilst the motorway pileup from Final Destination 2 has been the best up until now, the bridge collapse in this film is utterly mesmerising and edge of your seat thrilling. From the flawless special effects to the scale of the production, it surpasses anything seen before in the series.
The deaths have also returned to form too. Instead of out and out cheese, they’re shocking to the point of jaw-dropping. It’ll have you checking every loose nut and bolt from now on and probably have you resisting that fashionable laser eye surgery too. Thankfully though, away from the deaths, it errs on the side of humorous without delving into slapstick.
Nicholas D’Agosto leads a small cast as they try and find a way to cheat death after surviving that epic bridge disaster. An interesting storyline this time around has the cast told that they are able to cheat death by killing someone else, therefore having their life swapped with yours. The acting from all corners leaves a lot to be desired and the dialogue and performances are unashamedly wooden but this is a small point in a film that really does shock and surprise.
However, perhaps the best part of the film and the reason why it’s so enjoyable is the final twist, a twist that will leave you shouting at the screen in dismay. It’s practically impossible to see it coming until the last 5 minutes and in these last minutes you realise just how clever director Steven Quale has been in creating this film.
It may not be the most original movie to ever grace the big screen and the cast aren’t going to trouble the Oscars but Final Destination 5 returns a lifeless franchise to what it once was, bloody good fun and as such it is by far, the best in the series.
So, the question now is; do we need Final Destination 6?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/09/21/review-final-destination-5-2011/
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Happy Death Day 2U (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
Hands up if you laughed your way through this one? *throws hands up in the air*
This is where I love the horror genre, although I wouldn't really say this is horror. It's light-hearted and knows it doesn't need to take itself too seriously. It's sort of a horror comedy... A homedy? A corror? Definitely a homedy.
The trailer was a little misleading, I went in thinking that we were going to see them all stuck in the time loop which isn't the case. I'm probably happy that it ended up being different because I couldn't work out how they were going to do it otherwise.
When the original came out I was so happy to have discovered it. Horror is probably my least favourite genre but throw some homedy (it's happening people, go with it!) at me and I'm there for it. It's why I love the Screams and Final Destinations. HDD2U took it to another level, or should I say dimension?
While I loved this we could now have a potential problem, the third one could step over into Sharknado territory and become the parody but we'll have to cross that bridge when we come to it... and if I'm honest, this one was pretty close to that line anyway.
There's no way to deny the fact that 2 is riding on the coattails of its predecessor. It concentrates more on solving the cause of the loop rather than the mystery of who the killer is now and it isn't quite as compelling to watch. Neither is the fact that in this new loop we're given altered versions of the existing characters. We see a lot more of Danielle which if I'm honest isn't a good thing. She's still totes annoying but this time she brings a thespian side that leads to a truly terrible slapstick scene.
For sheer enjoyment as a follow on film it's brilliant but taken on its own merit it wouldn't get such high praise, but I had fun and that's what counts. I did see this for a second time and it unfortunately gave me more time to consider all the slightly dubious bits of it. It really hits hard on the sci-fi side of things, particularly in the mid-credit scene, and it doesn't feel quite right... now I'm wondering if it has already become its own parody...
What you should do
If you enjoyed the first one then you should totally see it, it's entertaining and much less serious about itself than the first but it's also much more ridiculous. Do remember to stay for the credit scene, you'll be able to see why I'm a little worried about any future endeavours.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'd probably still want Tree's fearlessness and resilience, but without having to die repeatedly to attain it.
This is where I love the horror genre, although I wouldn't really say this is horror. It's light-hearted and knows it doesn't need to take itself too seriously. It's sort of a horror comedy... A homedy? A corror? Definitely a homedy.
The trailer was a little misleading, I went in thinking that we were going to see them all stuck in the time loop which isn't the case. I'm probably happy that it ended up being different because I couldn't work out how they were going to do it otherwise.
When the original came out I was so happy to have discovered it. Horror is probably my least favourite genre but throw some homedy (it's happening people, go with it!) at me and I'm there for it. It's why I love the Screams and Final Destinations. HDD2U took it to another level, or should I say dimension?
While I loved this we could now have a potential problem, the third one could step over into Sharknado territory and become the parody but we'll have to cross that bridge when we come to it... and if I'm honest, this one was pretty close to that line anyway.
There's no way to deny the fact that 2 is riding on the coattails of its predecessor. It concentrates more on solving the cause of the loop rather than the mystery of who the killer is now and it isn't quite as compelling to watch. Neither is the fact that in this new loop we're given altered versions of the existing characters. We see a lot more of Danielle which if I'm honest isn't a good thing. She's still totes annoying but this time she brings a thespian side that leads to a truly terrible slapstick scene.
For sheer enjoyment as a follow on film it's brilliant but taken on its own merit it wouldn't get such high praise, but I had fun and that's what counts. I did see this for a second time and it unfortunately gave me more time to consider all the slightly dubious bits of it. It really hits hard on the sci-fi side of things, particularly in the mid-credit scene, and it doesn't feel quite right... now I'm wondering if it has already become its own parody...
What you should do
If you enjoyed the first one then you should totally see it, it's entertaining and much less serious about itself than the first but it's also much more ridiculous. Do remember to stay for the credit scene, you'll be able to see why I'm a little worried about any future endeavours.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'd probably still want Tree's fearlessness and resilience, but without having to die repeatedly to attain it.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Heat (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
In a fun twist to the traditional buddy-cop movie theme, this time we have a pair of ladies bringing The Heat to the streets of Boston for a laugh-out-loud good time.
Sandra Bullock and Melissa McCarthy bring action and some very sharp tongues to the big screen.
The story starts out by painting a picture of the two in their separate worlds. Special Agent Ashburn (Bullock) is very prim, proper, and by-the-book. She dresses for success, knows it all, and doesn’t let so much as an S-bomb pass her lips. As she solves a case (proving herself a know-it-all in front of coworkers), a bleak picture comes into focus that this very uptight FBI agent is just the beginning.
By contrast (and fitting the expected formula), Detective Mullins (McCarthy) uses a down-and-dirty, physical, and foul-mouthed method for cleaning up the streets of Boston. Her neighborhood is definitely her home, and it needs protecting. Mullins’ slovenly lifestyle is the complete polar opposite of Ashburn, as one might expect. This conflict is the driving force behind a typical buddy cop movie. The only difference is that it’s two women instead of the usual ingredients.
Ashburn is given an assignment in Boston. The assignment will be a key, deciding factor in her next promotion, so all she wants is a simple case to solve and close. Naturally, once Mullins and Ashburn meet, sparks fly and hilarity ensues.
I went into this with low expectations, but also a deep loathing for Sandra Bullock as an actress — every role she’s ever played has been essentially the same. I expected the same in The Heat. In an oh-so-surprising twist of fate, she ended up playing the sober, strait-laced character! Despite my lack of appreciation for her acting skills, I must say she did well; her comedic timing was spot-on, and it meshed well with McCarthy’s usual brand of comedy: vociferous and physical, bordering on slapstick. I did note during the film that Bullock is definitely starting to show her age; this is not a knock on her beauty, but more an admission that I am starting to feel old!
Mullins also plays the same character in every movie role she takes, so this character was no stretch for her at all. It seems she is just there to memorize lines and provide her unabashed, high-energy quips. That said, I have to give her mad props for comedic timing and delivery. She is a one-trick-pony, but that one trick is a damn good one.
All in all, this is a great film for laughs. I laughed out loud through much of it, which was a surprise. As with all comedies, I don’t recommend spending your hard-earned cash on these top-dollar theater tickets. Wait for the small screen, but definitely see it for a good, healthy chuckle.
Sandra Bullock and Melissa McCarthy bring action and some very sharp tongues to the big screen.
The story starts out by painting a picture of the two in their separate worlds. Special Agent Ashburn (Bullock) is very prim, proper, and by-the-book. She dresses for success, knows it all, and doesn’t let so much as an S-bomb pass her lips. As she solves a case (proving herself a know-it-all in front of coworkers), a bleak picture comes into focus that this very uptight FBI agent is just the beginning.
By contrast (and fitting the expected formula), Detective Mullins (McCarthy) uses a down-and-dirty, physical, and foul-mouthed method for cleaning up the streets of Boston. Her neighborhood is definitely her home, and it needs protecting. Mullins’ slovenly lifestyle is the complete polar opposite of Ashburn, as one might expect. This conflict is the driving force behind a typical buddy cop movie. The only difference is that it’s two women instead of the usual ingredients.
Ashburn is given an assignment in Boston. The assignment will be a key, deciding factor in her next promotion, so all she wants is a simple case to solve and close. Naturally, once Mullins and Ashburn meet, sparks fly and hilarity ensues.
I went into this with low expectations, but also a deep loathing for Sandra Bullock as an actress — every role she’s ever played has been essentially the same. I expected the same in The Heat. In an oh-so-surprising twist of fate, she ended up playing the sober, strait-laced character! Despite my lack of appreciation for her acting skills, I must say she did well; her comedic timing was spot-on, and it meshed well with McCarthy’s usual brand of comedy: vociferous and physical, bordering on slapstick. I did note during the film that Bullock is definitely starting to show her age; this is not a knock on her beauty, but more an admission that I am starting to feel old!
Mullins also plays the same character in every movie role she takes, so this character was no stretch for her at all. It seems she is just there to memorize lines and provide her unabashed, high-energy quips. That said, I have to give her mad props for comedic timing and delivery. She is a one-trick-pony, but that one trick is a damn good one.
All in all, this is a great film for laughs. I laughed out loud through much of it, which was a surprise. As with all comedies, I don’t recommend spending your hard-earned cash on these top-dollar theater tickets. Wait for the small screen, but definitely see it for a good, healthy chuckle.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Kingsman: The Secret Service (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Simply Brilliant
Director Matthew Vaughn has brought some visually striking films to the big screen in his fairly short career, from the brilliant Layer Cake, to the movie which many credit as saving the X-Men franchise, First Class, he certainly knows his way around a camera.
However, Kingsman: The Secret Service is probably his riskiest proposition yet. Can a dark comedy about upper-class British spies with their tailor-made suits compete with the very best films in the genre?
Thankfully the answer is a resounding yes. The spectacular cinematography and fantastic performances in Kingsman ensure it is one of the most memorable and cleverly crafted blockbusters of the last decade.
The film follows the story of underprivileged Eggsy, played wonderfully by Taron Egerton in his first full role, as he does his best to join The Kingsmen, a secret society of spies working to bring down evil in the world.
An absolutely marvellous Colin Firth and a slightly underused Michael Caine also play part of this group – possibly creating the poshest ensemble of characters seen in a film for years.
Naturally a spy flick isn’t complete without a villain and Samuel L Jackson is on course here to become one of the cheesiest megalomaniacs ever put to the big screen. His deliberately camp performance goes well with the dark humour throughout.
Kingsman is also genuinely funny and a real treat to watch with explosive, over-the-top visuals and beautiful scenery which utilises what the world has to offer rather than delving into the CGI drawer many directors employ nowadays.
It all feels decidedly old fashioned and all the better for it with an almost grainy quality to the production – think The Avengers TV series but with a higher budget.
The plot is top notch and whilst it may border on cliché at times, Kingsman manages to steer the story in enough directions to make sure the audience never settles into a rut, the use of our reliance on modern technology being a particular highlight.
Special effects wise, it holds up well with most other blockbusters and has just a few lapses in CGI at the start and towards the riveting finale,Taron_Egerton_SDCC_2014 though these are barely noticeable if you’re not looking hard enough.
Moreover, it is a true pleasure to sit in a film and not wonder what the producers had to cut to achieve a crowd-pleasing 12A certification. Kingsman pulls no punches, this is a violent rollercoaster ride and well deserves the BBFC 15 rating it has been given. Whether or not this hurts its box-office performance remains to be seen.
Overall, Kingsman: The Secret Service is one of the only films which combines the ever-popular spy genre with comedy and manages to keep its dignity in tact as the end credits role.
So many films, Johnny English: Reborn and Get Smart to name a couple, simply delve into slapstick territory once the writers run out of ideas – this isn’t the case here.
From its exciting plot and brutally dark humour, to the engaging performances from every single character, Kingsman: The Secret Service is simply brilliant.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/01/30/simply-brilliant-kingsman-the-secret-service-review/
However, Kingsman: The Secret Service is probably his riskiest proposition yet. Can a dark comedy about upper-class British spies with their tailor-made suits compete with the very best films in the genre?
Thankfully the answer is a resounding yes. The spectacular cinematography and fantastic performances in Kingsman ensure it is one of the most memorable and cleverly crafted blockbusters of the last decade.
The film follows the story of underprivileged Eggsy, played wonderfully by Taron Egerton in his first full role, as he does his best to join The Kingsmen, a secret society of spies working to bring down evil in the world.
An absolutely marvellous Colin Firth and a slightly underused Michael Caine also play part of this group – possibly creating the poshest ensemble of characters seen in a film for years.
Naturally a spy flick isn’t complete without a villain and Samuel L Jackson is on course here to become one of the cheesiest megalomaniacs ever put to the big screen. His deliberately camp performance goes well with the dark humour throughout.
Kingsman is also genuinely funny and a real treat to watch with explosive, over-the-top visuals and beautiful scenery which utilises what the world has to offer rather than delving into the CGI drawer many directors employ nowadays.
It all feels decidedly old fashioned and all the better for it with an almost grainy quality to the production – think The Avengers TV series but with a higher budget.
The plot is top notch and whilst it may border on cliché at times, Kingsman manages to steer the story in enough directions to make sure the audience never settles into a rut, the use of our reliance on modern technology being a particular highlight.
Special effects wise, it holds up well with most other blockbusters and has just a few lapses in CGI at the start and towards the riveting finale,Taron_Egerton_SDCC_2014 though these are barely noticeable if you’re not looking hard enough.
Moreover, it is a true pleasure to sit in a film and not wonder what the producers had to cut to achieve a crowd-pleasing 12A certification. Kingsman pulls no punches, this is a violent rollercoaster ride and well deserves the BBFC 15 rating it has been given. Whether or not this hurts its box-office performance remains to be seen.
Overall, Kingsman: The Secret Service is one of the only films which combines the ever-popular spy genre with comedy and manages to keep its dignity in tact as the end credits role.
So many films, Johnny English: Reborn and Get Smart to name a couple, simply delve into slapstick territory once the writers run out of ideas – this isn’t the case here.
From its exciting plot and brutally dark humour, to the engaging performances from every single character, Kingsman: The Secret Service is simply brilliant.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/01/30/simply-brilliant-kingsman-the-secret-service-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Wedding Ringer (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Best reserved for the DVD shelf
The comedy genre is one which goes through many cycles. You can go for years with lacklustre efforts featuring big-name celebrities like Norbit and Johnny English: Reborn, but every so often something special comes along to remind you how funny films can be – a la Bridesmaids or The Heat.
This year’s first offering is The Wedding Ringer. Fronted by Kevin Hart and Josh Gad, it follows the story of a loner who is forced to hire a best man to ensure his upcoming wedding goes without a hitch. But will it have you in fits of laughter or running from the altar?
Jeremy Garelick directs a film that despite a few chuckles here and there and the odd laugh-out-loud moment never really manages to settle into a groove and as such it all feels a little, well vanilla.
Dough Harris (Gad) is a man with a secret, one so big he is unable to share it with his obnoxious fiancée Gretchen – the normally adorable Kaley Cuoco-Sweeting in an against type performance. He simply hasn’t got any friends and is forced to hire Jimmy Callahan (Hart) as his best man to make himself look less of a loser.
Naturally things don’t go quite to plan with a selection of mildly amusing set-pieces involving bachelor parties, dogs and dancing interspersed with genuinely touching scenes which look at self-worth and finding true love and friendship.
Unfortunately this is where things begin to unravel. A mixture of slapstick and more complex comedic elements are put into a film which isn’t quite sure which genre it is trying to be, outright comedy or romantic comedy drama.
Hart plays Jimmy well and Gad is good as the bumbling yet sweet Doug, but the former seems to be on autopilot for the majority of The Wedding Ringer’s 101 minute running time while the latter seems to be just going through the motions, exhibiting no real connection with the script.
Other characters including a selection of hired groomsmen and close family barely register as cardboard cut-outs, never mind major characters in a motion picture.
However, the real fun to be had here is in the more childish sequences with one involving a dog, and another featuring an extended danceringer-dancing sequence having the audience in fits of laughter, though again these moments are few and far between.
Ultimately then, The Wedding Ringer isn’t as disappointing as it could have been but falls short of the comedic standard that audiences now expect when paying the increasingly expensive price of a cinema ticket.
Despite some reasonably charming performances, a couple of stand-out scenes and a cracking soundtrack, The Wedding Ringer fits into a bracket reserved for comedy films which could have delivered so much, but in the end just didn’t go quite far enough and it leaves Bridesmaids at the top of the pile for wedding-themed hilarity.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/02/22/best-reserved-for-the-dvd-shelf-the-wedding-ringer-review/
This year’s first offering is The Wedding Ringer. Fronted by Kevin Hart and Josh Gad, it follows the story of a loner who is forced to hire a best man to ensure his upcoming wedding goes without a hitch. But will it have you in fits of laughter or running from the altar?
Jeremy Garelick directs a film that despite a few chuckles here and there and the odd laugh-out-loud moment never really manages to settle into a groove and as such it all feels a little, well vanilla.
Dough Harris (Gad) is a man with a secret, one so big he is unable to share it with his obnoxious fiancée Gretchen – the normally adorable Kaley Cuoco-Sweeting in an against type performance. He simply hasn’t got any friends and is forced to hire Jimmy Callahan (Hart) as his best man to make himself look less of a loser.
Naturally things don’t go quite to plan with a selection of mildly amusing set-pieces involving bachelor parties, dogs and dancing interspersed with genuinely touching scenes which look at self-worth and finding true love and friendship.
Unfortunately this is where things begin to unravel. A mixture of slapstick and more complex comedic elements are put into a film which isn’t quite sure which genre it is trying to be, outright comedy or romantic comedy drama.
Hart plays Jimmy well and Gad is good as the bumbling yet sweet Doug, but the former seems to be on autopilot for the majority of The Wedding Ringer’s 101 minute running time while the latter seems to be just going through the motions, exhibiting no real connection with the script.
Other characters including a selection of hired groomsmen and close family barely register as cardboard cut-outs, never mind major characters in a motion picture.
However, the real fun to be had here is in the more childish sequences with one involving a dog, and another featuring an extended danceringer-dancing sequence having the audience in fits of laughter, though again these moments are few and far between.
Ultimately then, The Wedding Ringer isn’t as disappointing as it could have been but falls short of the comedic standard that audiences now expect when paying the increasingly expensive price of a cinema ticket.
Despite some reasonably charming performances, a couple of stand-out scenes and a cracking soundtrack, The Wedding Ringer fits into a bracket reserved for comedy films which could have delivered so much, but in the end just didn’t go quite far enough and it leaves Bridesmaids at the top of the pile for wedding-themed hilarity.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/02/22/best-reserved-for-the-dvd-shelf-the-wedding-ringer-review/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Vampires Suck (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
Vampires suck – but does the movie? We open on the San Salvatore Festival with the angsty Becca watching her beau, Edward Sullen, disrobe and expose his sparkly secrets- he’s a vampire! Cue the “True Blood- 40oz” toting, Mono-fang vampire to take Edward out….wait, we have to get the rest of the story! What follows is a parody of the first two movies of the Twilight Saga. Most of the characters analogous to the spoof’s target are introduced in the first 30 minutes; few of them are actually seen again throughout the movie.
Becca (newcomer Jenn Proske) is forced to move to Sporks, Washington, with her deadbeat father and town sheriff, Frank Crane (Diedrich Bader of The Drew Carey Show). Frank’s best friend is the rough-and-tumble paraplegic Native American, Bobby. His contribution to the plot is his hunky teenage son, Jacob White (Chris Riggi of Gossip Girl). The town of Sporks seems to have vampires on the brain and its population is only growing smaller.
Our heroine is introduced to Edward Sullen (Matt Lanter of Disaster Movie) and what follows is the “classic” story of girl-meets-vampire, girl-loses-vampire, girl-gets-threatened-by-vampire-nemesis, etc. Writers/Directors Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer use their formulaic approach to spoof movies by making the plot a cliff-notes version of the Stephanie Meyer’s original material, with ample jokes thrown in-in an attempt to beef up their rendition.
In fact, there are so many visual jokes in the movie that it left me wondering what a sight-impaired person might conclude of the movie. “What are all these people laughing at?” I noticed a few of the dialogue driven jokes weren’t even played off by the actors. They seemed to have been missed by everyone, including the editors. Other jokes are pop-culture references that will get stale with time. They’re integrated well, but definitely dated. The movie is redolent with the classic American comedy tradition of slapstick, which occasionally comes off as funny.
The production value left something to be desired as several scenes were obviously one-takes. I counted several instances where Becca’s kiss left Edward’s mouth with a smudge of his own flesh-tone showing through. But hey- at least single takes have continuity, right? The contacts, no doubt purchased in bulk, gave the characters an occasional Marty Feldman goggly-look. The effect is hilarious, although I’m not always sure if it’s intentional.
The cast has its standouts. Jenn Proske’s Becca comes dangerously close (like copyright-violating close) to the performance of Kristen Stewart’s Bella as the fidgety, twitchy, sullen and hormone-y heroine. And Ken Jeong (The Hangover) as Daro, while not appearing on screen much, definitely makes his comedic presence felt.
All in all, “Vampires Suck” didn’t really suck… it kind of chews, like gum. Gum out of the package is fresh, flavorful, but the longer you chew it, the tougher and more stale it becomes. This movie is fresh, funny, and quirky right now, but it won’t stand the test of time like more accomplished parodies.
Becca (newcomer Jenn Proske) is forced to move to Sporks, Washington, with her deadbeat father and town sheriff, Frank Crane (Diedrich Bader of The Drew Carey Show). Frank’s best friend is the rough-and-tumble paraplegic Native American, Bobby. His contribution to the plot is his hunky teenage son, Jacob White (Chris Riggi of Gossip Girl). The town of Sporks seems to have vampires on the brain and its population is only growing smaller.
Our heroine is introduced to Edward Sullen (Matt Lanter of Disaster Movie) and what follows is the “classic” story of girl-meets-vampire, girl-loses-vampire, girl-gets-threatened-by-vampire-nemesis, etc. Writers/Directors Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer use their formulaic approach to spoof movies by making the plot a cliff-notes version of the Stephanie Meyer’s original material, with ample jokes thrown in-in an attempt to beef up their rendition.
In fact, there are so many visual jokes in the movie that it left me wondering what a sight-impaired person might conclude of the movie. “What are all these people laughing at?” I noticed a few of the dialogue driven jokes weren’t even played off by the actors. They seemed to have been missed by everyone, including the editors. Other jokes are pop-culture references that will get stale with time. They’re integrated well, but definitely dated. The movie is redolent with the classic American comedy tradition of slapstick, which occasionally comes off as funny.
The production value left something to be desired as several scenes were obviously one-takes. I counted several instances where Becca’s kiss left Edward’s mouth with a smudge of his own flesh-tone showing through. But hey- at least single takes have continuity, right? The contacts, no doubt purchased in bulk, gave the characters an occasional Marty Feldman goggly-look. The effect is hilarious, although I’m not always sure if it’s intentional.
The cast has its standouts. Jenn Proske’s Becca comes dangerously close (like copyright-violating close) to the performance of Kristen Stewart’s Bella as the fidgety, twitchy, sullen and hormone-y heroine. And Ken Jeong (The Hangover) as Daro, while not appearing on screen much, definitely makes his comedic presence felt.
All in all, “Vampires Suck” didn’t really suck… it kind of chews, like gum. Gum out of the package is fresh, flavorful, but the longer you chew it, the tougher and more stale it becomes. This movie is fresh, funny, and quirky right now, but it won’t stand the test of time like more accomplished parodies.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Spycies (2020) in Movies
Feb 22, 2020
A lot of the obscure kid's films I see at the cinema just appear with no warning, that means an exciting trip of uncertainty!
Vladimir the cat is a top spy at the Agency but after causing so much damage to property in a recent mission he's sent out to a remote station as penance. There he meets Hector, a tech genius rat who's isolation has left him craving company and eager to bond.
There isn't much excitement in their lives, just Hector's soaps on TV and trying to decide which pizza to heat up. Until one day the dullness is interrupted by a team who infiltrate the compound and steal something from the vault. After they make their escape Vlad and Hector head home to hunt down the perpetrators and get back what was stolen.
What I want to say about Spycies first is that the animation is amazing. I was blown away by some of the shots. The poster states it's from the animators of Despicable Me, Minions and The Secret Life Of Pets, I really thought this was an attempt to cash in on connections, and it is to an extent as this is relatively unknown but it does stand on its own once you see it.
The station that Hector and Vladimir are on is an oil rig out in open water and a lot of the shots are done during a storm, these scenes are incredible. One in particular felt like real footage and not animation, it was absolutely beautiful.
There's no denying that this is Zootropolis/Zootopia with spies, that thought bothered me more after watching it than it did during. It feels like they made a very specific selection of animals to be different. The other big difference is that it's clear it's set at some point in the future, and this is probably my only major issue.
Futuristic isn't something you really get from the world of Spycies, apart from when you look at the vehicles. The opening sequence, while epic on action movie scales, was very chaotic and the vehicles being new and unusual just added to that. With so much tradition around the film this felt out of place.
As an adult watching this film it was noticeable that it was made for a foreign market, it has clear regional influences that might not land for everyone but I suspect that the kids won't be too bothered about them.
I quite like the story but it isn't necessarily anything new. James Bond (yes, there's a Bond, James Bond moment in there) meets Zootropolis with flashes of Spies In Disguise. Familiar might feel stale but I enjoyed it. The script doesn't quite fit with the audience it's aimed at, it's probably not quite fun enough for kids but there's plenty of action and slapstick to keep them entertained as well as adults.
[On the title itself... I'm assuming it's a play on the word "species"?]
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/02/spycies-movie-review.html
Vladimir the cat is a top spy at the Agency but after causing so much damage to property in a recent mission he's sent out to a remote station as penance. There he meets Hector, a tech genius rat who's isolation has left him craving company and eager to bond.
There isn't much excitement in their lives, just Hector's soaps on TV and trying to decide which pizza to heat up. Until one day the dullness is interrupted by a team who infiltrate the compound and steal something from the vault. After they make their escape Vlad and Hector head home to hunt down the perpetrators and get back what was stolen.
What I want to say about Spycies first is that the animation is amazing. I was blown away by some of the shots. The poster states it's from the animators of Despicable Me, Minions and The Secret Life Of Pets, I really thought this was an attempt to cash in on connections, and it is to an extent as this is relatively unknown but it does stand on its own once you see it.
The station that Hector and Vladimir are on is an oil rig out in open water and a lot of the shots are done during a storm, these scenes are incredible. One in particular felt like real footage and not animation, it was absolutely beautiful.
There's no denying that this is Zootropolis/Zootopia with spies, that thought bothered me more after watching it than it did during. It feels like they made a very specific selection of animals to be different. The other big difference is that it's clear it's set at some point in the future, and this is probably my only major issue.
Futuristic isn't something you really get from the world of Spycies, apart from when you look at the vehicles. The opening sequence, while epic on action movie scales, was very chaotic and the vehicles being new and unusual just added to that. With so much tradition around the film this felt out of place.
As an adult watching this film it was noticeable that it was made for a foreign market, it has clear regional influences that might not land for everyone but I suspect that the kids won't be too bothered about them.
I quite like the story but it isn't necessarily anything new. James Bond (yes, there's a Bond, James Bond moment in there) meets Zootropolis with flashes of Spies In Disguise. Familiar might feel stale but I enjoyed it. The script doesn't quite fit with the audience it's aimed at, it's probably not quite fun enough for kids but there's plenty of action and slapstick to keep them entertained as well as adults.
[On the title itself... I'm assuming it's a play on the word "species"?]
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/02/spycies-movie-review.html
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Transformers Revenge of the Fallen (2009) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
The good, the bad, and the down right ugly return in the sequel to Michael Bay’s 2007 summer blockbuster, Transformers. Revenge of the Fallen picks up 2 years after the events of the first film and really shows why Michael Bay was again the perfect choice to helm this franchise. Speculation about how long the film was going to be has finally been answered. 2 and a half hours for the uninitiated would seem a terrifying prospect as characters are introduced from all corners; but for fans of the bots, it’s a thrill ride from the very start, right up until the end credits role. Shia Le Beouf and Megan Foxx return as Sam Witwicky and love interest Mikeala in a sequel that’s as loud and obnoxious as it is long. As with the first film, the story is a little thin on the ground, but thankfully there is enough here to satisfy even the hardest to please. The Decepticons (the bad guys) are mobilizing once again to take control of Earth, while the Autobots (the good guys) working together with human intelligence try to destroy their feared rivals. It’s based on plastic toy figures, so you can’t expect much more.
Special effects are again outstanding with a finish on them that not even the first movie could hold a candle to, the transformers once more look 100% realistic in their presence, though with a $200m budget, outstanding was the least to be expected. Regrettably, the action sequences sometimes can look messy, with a mash of metal making it hard to distinguish who is attacking who or who has fallen; one heart wrenching scene in particular makes this point even more evident. Acting from all corners is sublime, Le Beouf certainly knows how to do that cocky teenager and Megan Foxx provides a nice bit of lustre to place on the horizon. But, by far the standout is Julie White as Mrs. Witwicky, her performance in the first film was brilliant, but she has exceeded that by a mile in this instalment; utterly hilarious is the only way to describe her acting. Of the robotic kind, Peter Cullen does an excellent job as the voice of Autobot leader Optimus Prime, with the same gravely texture that made him such a hit for the cartoon series in the first place. Hugo Weaving also returns as the voice of arch nemesis Megatron. Bay packs on the slapstick in this sequel, perhaps going a little too far with the humour; after all, it isn’t supposed to be an outright comedy, though some of the funny touches are out-and-out hilarious. The finale is, as with its predecessor a little short and to the point, though many would say it was ‘succinct’, but any longer and the film would have started to drag, Bay obviously learning his lesson from the mess that was Pearl Harbour. Overall then, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is an excellent sequel to what promises to be an exciting future for the franchise. Whilst it may not match its predecessor in terms of story and plot, it is a must watch for all action cravers.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2010/10/18/transformers-revenge-of-the-fallen-2009/
Special effects are again outstanding with a finish on them that not even the first movie could hold a candle to, the transformers once more look 100% realistic in their presence, though with a $200m budget, outstanding was the least to be expected. Regrettably, the action sequences sometimes can look messy, with a mash of metal making it hard to distinguish who is attacking who or who has fallen; one heart wrenching scene in particular makes this point even more evident. Acting from all corners is sublime, Le Beouf certainly knows how to do that cocky teenager and Megan Foxx provides a nice bit of lustre to place on the horizon. But, by far the standout is Julie White as Mrs. Witwicky, her performance in the first film was brilliant, but she has exceeded that by a mile in this instalment; utterly hilarious is the only way to describe her acting. Of the robotic kind, Peter Cullen does an excellent job as the voice of Autobot leader Optimus Prime, with the same gravely texture that made him such a hit for the cartoon series in the first place. Hugo Weaving also returns as the voice of arch nemesis Megatron. Bay packs on the slapstick in this sequel, perhaps going a little too far with the humour; after all, it isn’t supposed to be an outright comedy, though some of the funny touches are out-and-out hilarious. The finale is, as with its predecessor a little short and to the point, though many would say it was ‘succinct’, but any longer and the film would have started to drag, Bay obviously learning his lesson from the mess that was Pearl Harbour. Overall then, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is an excellent sequel to what promises to be an exciting future for the franchise. Whilst it may not match its predecessor in terms of story and plot, it is a must watch for all action cravers.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2010/10/18/transformers-revenge-of-the-fallen-2009/